Nobody ever apologizes.

I don’t know why this exemplar of good manners has vanished. Perhaps the self-esteem movement decided it damages one’s sense of self-worth. Or maybe some staff attorney decided it admits guilt and is too risky to utter.

Or maybe nobody ever told customer service representatives the first words they should utter (once customers outlast the automated, “Your call is important to us,” lie to present a complaint) should be, “I’m sorry you’ve had a problem. How can I help you?”

A real-world example, directly relevant to your job: A correspondent called her bank’s interactive voice response (IVR) system to check her balance. Pressing a few dozen buttons revealed that her account balance was precisely zilch. A few more buttons and she heard about a large transaction, not of her doing, which had cleaned out the account.

The next morning, in one of those Burns-and-Allen conversations in which each follow-up question elicits an increasingly peculiar response, she heard:

  • A recent merger caused some account numbers, including hers, to duplicate those of some of the other bank’s customers. Everyone affected was assigned new account numbers (and accounts).
  • No, I can’t tell you your current balance. If I had your date of birth on file I could, but that didn’t survive the conversion so I can’t.”
  • “Your automatic payments? We notified all of the companies. Some will accept the change; others won’t. [How will I know?] “You’ll just have to work through that.”
  • “Your new account number? No, we can’t give that out over the telephone. It should be on your new checks, though.” [What new checks?] “You didn’t order new checks? This was covered in the letter we sent… Oh, I guess that wouldn’t have helped: We only sent them a week before the change, so you wouldn’t have had time to do anything.”
  • “You never received the letter?” [No.] “No, I can’t send you a copy.” [Who can?] “I don’t know.”

And on and on. What she never heard was, “We’re sorry for the inconvenience.”

Why is this more to you than just an amusing anecdote?

Think how much of the above disaster either originated in or could have been ameliorated by IS. New account numbers could have been assigned months before merging the systems, and with a little custom programming, provided through both printed bank statements and a pre-recorded IVR message. Losing the birth date field on a database conversion is an amazing lapse. As far as handling the conversion of automatic bill payments to new account numbers, it doesn’t take much imagination to invent a half-dozen automated procedures that would have made problems rare exceptions.

No, IS doesn’t own the whole episode. But here’s something to ponder:

This conversion might have been good business if only employees had been inconvenienced. Dealing with exceptions manually is sometimes the right decision.

Real, paying customers have, and should have, higher expectations. In an age of e-commerce, your mistakes will, increasingly, drive customers into the arms of your competitors. And in this age of e-commerce, IS will increasingly be held accountable, not just the delivery of working technology, but for final business results.

A recent DSL ad touts the wonders of 256K Internet access. Web sites “fly by” … instead of staying on the screen, I guess. “Talk on the phone while you’re on-line,” … Miss Manners wouldn’t approve. And, it’s “nine times faster than a 28.8 modem,” as if 28.8 Kbps modems still set the standard. The name of this wondrous service? “MegaBit”.

Yes, Megabit apparently means 0.256 Mbps. The same committee (no one person can create stupidity of this caliber) will probably re-label T1 service as “Gigabit – the connection that runs 30 times faster than a 56K modem!”.

Innumeracy (the numerical equivalent of illiteracy as described in John Allen Paulos’s eponymous book) runs rampant, and despite heavy emphasis of finance and accounting in MBA programs, bad numbers are common in the executive suite, too.

Numerical problems found at the “C-level” (CEO, CFO, COO …) aren’t as egregious as an unbalanced checkbook. They’re more like driving a car whose dashboard includes only a speedometer and odometer.

We’re continuing with last week’s subject – creating an executive dashboard. The best-known method is the “balanced scorecard”, developed by Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton (The Balanced Scorecard, Harvard Business School Publishing, 1996). Their balanced scorecard methodology turns a business’s strategic objectives into specific measures in four key dimensions: Financial, customer, process, and “learning and growth”.

The balanced scorecard methodology itself is fine. As with all methodologies, though, it tempts people to replace artistry with painting by numbers. Many CEOs, pressed for time and impatient with the difficulty of achieving executive consensus, will bypass the hard work of developing custom measures and instead adopt someone else’s because “we shouldn’t reinvent the wheel.”

At the risk of straining automotive metaphors to their limits, I’ll respectfully point out that when you’re in the wheel business, you’d better reinvent the wheel … often. Since balanced scorecard measures are driven by (sorry) your company’s strategic objectives, you have to reinvent the wheel, or the whole exercise is pointless. No, it’s worse than pointless – having no measures simply means you’re ignorant, but having the wrong measures means you’re misinformed.

Time constraints in the executive suite are real, though, and executive consensus really is hard to achieve. And since as CIO your name is inextricably linked to the notion that huge investments in “information” will somehow lead to better decision-making, guess who’s going to get blamed when the balanced scorecard doesn’t deliver its promised results?

Here’s how you can turn this to your advantage: Offer to facilitate the process. You’re the logical candidate, because:

  • Chances are good that IS employs the best mathematicians in the company. Poorly constructed formulas can wreck the best-conceived business metrics, and forcing executives to spend time fine-tuning equations will kill a project like this dead.
  • The only business measures that work are those that are collected and reported automatically. We’re long past the age of manual data collection and tabulation. It will be IS that turns production databases and analytical data warehouses or marts into the dashboard measures once they’re developed.
  • You run the intranet anyway, and that’s where the dashboard will go.
  • And finally … in modern companies, IS should be all about the process of translating business vision to operational reality. Balanced scorecard implementations are just one more example.You own everything except the consensus itself, and by making that happen, you’ll elevate your own status in the bargain.

What’s not to like?